The superceder of GSM and CDMA is LTE. E.g., some 2G CDMA networks are going away. LTE network devices should have SIM cards. It was a requirement the FCC put on providers when they opened up more spectrum.
All iPhones have a SIM card.
If you buy a new model phone, it will have a SIM card. (Although you don’t have to go all that retro to get a 3G CDMA phone for Verizon, for example.)
$20 or $30? My daughters are using phones we paid $5.00 for at Dollar General. They came with chargers and 20 minutes of airtime.
I paid $9 for mine-phone, charger, 30 minutes. Refill minutes are dirt cheap. It does a lot of things besides the usual phone-like functions. Camera, video, email, web. I find it hard to believe people are willing to pay hundreds of dollars for cell phones and contracts.
My understanding is that FCC licensing is only required if your transmitter is over a certain wattage. Such that a transmitter that would only reach the 100 foot between your hay barn and house doesn’t need all that fancy-pants “station ID” mumbo-jumbo.
A cell phone only need to reach the nearest tower, from there it’s on the company’s carrier. I wonder there’s a connection.
Another example is one of these wireless microphones a stage perform would use. It only transmits to the receiver right there on stage. Only then is it sent out on the radio station’s frequency. The radio station needs the license, but the performer does not.
Because I wouldn’t have a phone. My phone is a month to month burner because I don’t need more.
In various other countries you can still buy “burner” phones but you need to show ID in order to do so and they activate the sim with your name attached to it.
This still misses the point; the phones are quite identifiable. Not only is the phone unique, but the phone carries an ident that ties it to the carrier. A phone cannot operate without a carrier ident (ie a SIM). If a carrier wishes to stop a phone from making calls, it can. Even with a new SIM, a phone can, in principle, be disabled. This was the saga of getting carriers to agree to black list stolen phones. There is no technical barrier to placing a worldwide stop on a given phone from operating.
A jammer is not a phone. And a phone cannot be used to deny service. This come to the fore in the remit of most communication regulatory authorities. They tend to concern themselves with ensuring that the services they regulate work properly. This is why they worry about licensing transmitters and regulating how they are sold and used. Anything that might impinge upon the working of a service they tend to view very dimly. Not just jammers, but poorly managed or designed equipment that might interfere with services. They allow a remarkable number of radio equipment to operate without an individual license. WiFi, Bluetooth, CB, radio controlled models, are common examples. They place very specific regulations on how these services work, and equipment needs to be approved, but that is as far as it goes. Mobile phones have an intermediate regulatory life, where the carrier is the entity that is licensed, and remains responsible for the behaviour of their network. There is no inherent difference between the radio transmitter capability of the WiFi in your laptop or home router and the capability of a phone. Both operate an approved set of protocols on defined frequencies with set power levels. So long as burner phone is not modified, and operates as designed, there is no potential for it to interfere with other services. All it can do is what it was sold to do - make phone calls.
Identification of burner phones is not a technical question. They are uniquely identifiable, and the carrier (ie TracPhone via the networks it contracts) knows exactly what phones are operating. At any time they can perform all tracing, tracking, and disablement possible with any mobile phone. The only question is why there is no regulation requiring personal ID upon their purchase. As has been noted, a large fraction of the planet does require such ID. But the ID isn’t required for purchase of a phone, it is required for purchase of a SIM, because it is the SIM, not the phone, that actually matters. It is what gets the phone the ability to connect to a network, and from there defines the phone number that phone has. TracFone blurs the distinction because the SIM is physically part of the phone.
Tying a human to a SIM (and thus phone number) is IMHO a good thing. It means that if you get a phone call there is at least some protection that the person making the call is traceable, and there is some level of responsibility taken on the part of the caller. Sadly the modern age of VOIP and number spoofing means that caller-id is no longer the useful thing it once was. Requiring ID is much less about terrorists and criminals than about stalkers and harassing phone calls.
I will note, that for criminals, burner phones have somewhat limited utility. They can be used to make an anonymous call, but the recipient has to have a number known to the criminal. And if the criminal wishes to receive calls, they need a number known to the caller. A petty drug dealer will find a burner phone useless, as he will need his customers to know his number. A criminal network might find a set of burner phones useful if they are all used for the same time interval, and the phone numbers of all the new phones distributed together. Then they all get replaced with a new set. It would be naive to think that such patterns could not be discovered in the network’s database.
And of course, the real criminals will buy it with a fake/stolen ID.
When that man Warren Jeffs got caught in Vegas for the unmentionable act of marriage to a girl too young they found him with half dozen cell phones and indicated that that was illegal. Is it?
I hope the laws stay the same … Big Brother wants your cell phone and gun records to match :eek:
According to this 2006 article about that arrest, he had 14 cell phones, but I don’t think that’s the same thing as saying that the cell phones were illegal. From the article:
Money*, wigs, GPS units, the Book of Mormon, and pictures of someone with his dad aren’t illegal, but when a fugitive felon is arrested, the authorities will presumably seize pretty much everything in the vehicle (or motel room or whatever) and document all property the arrested person had on him. And all sorts of things can be evidence without being illegal–if the police are looking for someone who robbed the First National Bank and witnesses described the perpetrator as wearing a beanie with a propeller on top, then if the cops catch a suspect nearby who is in possession of a propeller beanie, that could be considered evidence (along with the satchel full of bundles of cash with “First National Bank” wrappers still on them). That doesn’t mean propeller beanies are illegal, though.
*Although more and more these days having large quantities of cash is treated as suspicious in and of itself, which is a controversial subject.
More Area codes, and to me that is a problem. San Jose used to have one Area Code. The phone companies wanted a overlay. I pointed out that numerically there were enuf numbers for every man, woman & child, lo unto the newborns- to have more than 10 numbers. They withdrew the request.
Then three years later, they went back in and got it quickly approved.
I don’t think it’s correct that very cheap phones are necessarily treated as disposable. Many of the cheap “feature” phones sold by Tracfone and its related companies are acceptable if all you want to do is make and receive calls. I’ve known people who have gotten years of reliable service from them, including several people who could afford any high end smart phone (they just didn’t want one).
Australian Drivers License and ID cards are made with several layers of hologram including over the photo. Beyond the ability of a small time dealer to obtain. Nothing is perfect but it seems to work.
Why would they? What commercial interest is forcing them to? The other situations you described had someone pressing them.
As for jammers, those have the phone companies themselves arguing against them. They fear that customers would be upset if they can’t use their phone. But no one seems to be upset by burner phones.
And, as pointed out, they are in fact used by a lot of people, meaning people would be upset at losing them.
OK, thanks. I guess my question should have been ‘Why aren’t burner phones more easily traceable?’ and the answer is they are. Guess I’ve been watching too much Law & Order recently… 
The FCC is a govt regulatory body. They are supposed to have the public’s interest ahead of commercial ones (and/or at least strike a reasonable balance).